You can't lose if you don't play...

In 2009 we had lots of picks but no first round or third round pick due to the Roy Williams trade.

Jerry then traded out of the second round and drafted poorly for this team with the picks he received.

It wasn't the trade down that was flawed - it was the draft strategy of aiming for a "special teams" draft that did us in.

In a draft with this kind of depth but little impact talent at the top I do like the trade down scenario.

There is nothing magical about the first round. There used to only be 28 teams meaning the 29th pick was in the second round and now it is in the first round. Did the 32nd player suddenly become a better football player now that he is selected in the first instead of the second round? It doesn't make any sense.

I really think there is first round value for many players selected between 30-45 in this draft and I'd love to get 2 picks in this range and then throw in 5 more before the 4th round is through for a total of 7 picks instead of our allotted 5.

I think we can get a very high quality OG, OLB and CB in the second round this year who may normally go in the bottom of the first in most drafts if we play our cards right. I think these 3 could be starters before the 2012 season is through.

Great minds think alike.

I think I may have started a thread on this recently. Premise was that drafting a true BPA that fills the greatest need is inherently harder, the higher you move up the draft order.

The "gaps" in value between picks 1,2,3 and 4 are greater than picks 33, 34, 35 and 36.

And because the 4th or 10th or even 14th selection has so much more value than the 33rd or 53rd, it's even more critical that the selection is both BPA and need satisfying.

If I were GM, I'd end up trading my 1st round selection both down and up, far more often than I'd find myself executing it. Out of 10 drafts, I could see 5-6 trade downs, 2-3 trade ups and 1-3 selections with the original pick.

Biggest deternmining factor would be where the pick was in Rd 1. Top 10 is more likely to get moved one way or another. Bottom 10 is more likely to get executed.

Of course the next factor is the make up of the team and if there's one glaring need. Especially if that need is at a premium position like QB or Pass Rusher. That's when you're likely to trade up to that spot where you believe the BPA fills that need.

Now for this Cowboys team, I think the signs point to a trade down from 14.

I can't say FS is a greater need than OC. I also can't ignore the fact that we have multiple other needs that are close in the pecking order.

And while we have multiple needs, FA has muted the gravity of those needs. CB was the one above and beyond all other needs and Carr filled that. Last year it was RT and since the draft came before FA, we made sure that critical need was filled at pick 9.

So in a nutshell, I'm not seeing was absolutely must have need to be filled.

OMT For what it's worth, theteam did come out and say they were looking to find 3 starters out of this draft class.......that's a tall order.

Question is, are we more likely to find three starters with our current picks or would we be more likely with 4 selections between picks 33 and 65?

I think I may have started a thread on this recently. Premise was that drafting a true BPA that fills the greatest need is inherently harder, the higher you move up the draft order.

The "gaps" in value between picks 1,2,3 and 4 are greater than picks 33, 34, 35 and 36.

And because the 4th or 10th or even 14th selection has so much more value than the 33rd or 53rd, it's even more critical that the selection is both BPA and need satisfying.

If I were GM, I'd end up trading my 1st round selection both down and up, far more often than I'd find myself executing it. Out of 10 drafts, I could see 5-6 trade downs, 2-3 trade ups and 1-3 selections with the original pick.

Biggest deternmining factor would be where the pick was in Rd 1. Top 10 is more likely to get moved one way or another. Bottom 10 is more likely to get executed.

Of course the next factor is the make up of the team and if there's one glaring need. Especially if that need is at a premium position like QB or Pass Rusher. That's when you're likely to trade up to that spot where you believe the BPA fills that need.

Now for this Cowboys team, I think the signs point to a trade down from 14.

I can't say FS is a greater need than OC. I also can't ignore the fact that we have multiple other needs that are close in the pecking order.

And while we have multiple needs, FA has muted the gravity of those needs. CB was the one above and beyond all other needs and Carr filled that. Last year it was RT and since the draft came before FA, we made sure that critical need was filled at pick 9.

So in a nutshell, I'm not seeing was absolutely must have need to be filled.

OMT For what it's worth, theteam did come out and say they were looking to find 3 starters out of this draft class.......that's a tall order.

Question is, are we more likely to find three starters with our current picks or would we be more likely with 4 selections between picks 33 and 65?

Many of the concepts you have alluded to here make a great deal of sense. The reason most teams don't want to drop too far down is there is a group of players at the top who look like very low risk future high quality starters. After that group there is then a fairly substantial drop in quality. In this draft that drop-off is somewhere around pick 60 or so, IMO. Usually it's probably somewhere around 23.

The ability to drop back almost certainly will result in better ability to draft BPA at a position of your desire for the reasons you name. Furthermore, I would add that BPAs at non-positions of need become even more clear, though. The other thing to keep in mind is slotting of players becomes much more inconsistent after the first 30 or so guys and at that point you have to follow your instincts about whether a trade needs to be made to secure the player you want and who else might be after them.

As for whether we can find 3 starters in this 2nd round - I think we can definitely find an OLB, DE, OG and CB who will be future starters in this year's second round if we choose to focus our efforts there. I actually think the biggest key is having patience as many of these players may not start until 2013.

I don't know about taking two DEs so high when we still have Lissemore, Hatcher and Geathers as youngish guys with some athleticism already on the roster. We might draft one in the first 3 rounds but two would shock me. I think one of those picks should go to OLB because I really don't believe Spencer is on this team come 2013.

The other thing is I think you went CB a little late for my tastes. I really think we should take one before the end of the second because of the high risk of losing Jenkins after this year and the fact that we only have 3 on the roster and Jenkins recovery is still uncertain right now.

I still get upset that everyone wants to draft a Center who may be much worse than the guy we already know can play in this league - Killa Kowalski. You could use that pick on a guy like Brroyles or maybe Brandon Boykin if he falls. I actually really like both of these guys and Crick in the 3rd.

I don't know about taking two DEs so high when we still have Lissemore, Hatcher and Geathers as youngish guys with some athleticism already on the roster. We might draft one in the first 3 rounds but two would shock me. I think one of those picks should go to OLB because I really don't believe Spencer is on this team come 2013.

The other thing is I think you went CB a little late for my tastes. I really think we should take one before the end of the second because of the high risk of losing Jenkins after this year and the fact that we only have 3 on the roster and Jenkins recovery is still uncertain right now.

I still get upset that everyone wants to draft a Center who may be much worse than the guy we already know can play in this league - Killa Kowalski. You could use that pick on a guy like Brroyles or maybe Brandon Boykin if he falls. I actually really like both of these guys and Crick in the 3rd.

McLellin is an OLB, and a good one at that.

I think we, as all fans do grossly overrate our talent. Hatcher is 30 years-old, Lissimore looks like a decent rotational guy with some upside and Geathers is a guy no one else seemed to want all that badly. Couple that with an aging mediocre Spears, and old man Coleman and you have a very average group of ends. NT also needs to be addressed and getting Chapman at that spot would be an affodable luxury with Rat and Brent holding down the fort until he's ready.

I don't see the need of drafting another corner high when chances are he will be the fourth corner at best anyhow. Without a consistent, deep defensive line your corners are marginlized.

Upon reflection I might agree on the center spot and replace the pick with Broyles or Hilton.

I think we, as all fans do grossly overrate our talent. Hatcher is 30 years-old, Lissimore looks like a decent rotational guy with some upside and Geathers is a guy no one else seemed to want all that badly. Couple that with an aging mediocre Spears, and old man Coleman and you have a very average group of ends. NT also needs to be addressed and getting Chapman at that spot would be an affodable luxury with Rat and Brent holding down the fort until he's ready.

I don't see the need of drafting another corner high when chances are he will be the fourth corner at best anyhow. Without a consistent, deep defensive line your corners are marginlized.

Upon reflection I might agree on the center spot and replace the pick with Broyles or Hilton.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you had forgotten OLB but only pointed out that you took two 3-4 DEs with premium picks.

I do agree the position has been far too neglected here but I really think you are selling Lissemore short. It is much easier to rate a player who is actually out there against NFL talent than a guy playing against college guys and you could see Lissemore out there more and more as the year went on and probably creating more pressure than anyone other than Ratliff. This guy came from a very small college so his rookie year was almost a redshirt year and last year was more like a rookie year. So I expect the same jump from him this year that I would normally expect in a second year player and I believe there is major upside there. The depth part of the equation is that we run four reasonably young guys out there who are under contract the next couple of years so adding one guy this year is enough and maybe we can add another next year or draft a later round project. In my little mock I suggested taking a guy like Bequette as a bit of a project - he is 6-5 and goes about 275. Put him in the weightroom for a year and he could emerge as a 295 pounder with length and agility that we need to run an aggressive 3-4.

Now as for the CB issue we have Carr. Jenkins is hurt - who knows if he is going to even be ready at the start of the season. He had extensive shoulder surgery and that is a very complicated joint prone to complications from major surgeries. The next part to consider is that he is a FA and we may choose not to re-sign him due to injury concerns or cost concerns if he can command a $11M/yr deal in the open market next year. If that is the case we are down to only Carr and Scandrick. As for Scandrick I just don't think he is very good and we should seek to upgrade that position. He is always chasing in man coverage and makes very few plays on the ball even when he is in position. Scandrick best suits a zone-based scheme but this is not what we run and he is a major liability anytime we want press against 3-WR lineups.

I would suggest in the first 3 rounds getting 5 picks through trade downs and trying to come up with 1 DE, 1 OLB, 1 OG, 1 CB and then one other player where value and need match up well - maybe a #3WR/KR, another CB, second TE, Safety, another DE or another OL in roughly that order of preference.

I would do it and grab McClellin, Konz, Mercilus, Branch, Zeitler or Glenn, in that order. And then at 45 I'd grab whoever on that list was there (excluding the two guard combo). If none of them drop, it's bpa from then on.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you had forgotten OLB but only pointed out that you took two 3-4 DEs with premium picks.

I do agree the position has been far too neglected here but I really think you are selling Lissemore short. It is much easier to rate a player who is actually out there against NFL talent than a guy playing against college guys and you could see Lissemore out there more and more as the year went on and probably creating more pressure than anyone other than Ratliff. This guy came from a very small college so his rookie year was almost a redshirt year and last year was more like a rookie year. So I expect the same jump from him this year that I would normally expect in a second year player and I believe there is major upside there. The depth part of the equation is that we run four reasonably young guys out there who are under contract the next couple of years so adding one guy this year is enough and maybe we can add another next year or draft a later round project. In my little mock I suggested taking a guy like Bequette as a bit of a project - he is 6-5 and goes about 275. Put him in the weightroom for a year and he could emerge as a 295 pounder with length and agility that we need to run an aggressive 3-4.

Now as for the CB issue we have Carr. Jenkins is hurt - who knows if he is going to even be ready at the start of the season. He had extensive shoulder surgery and that is a very complicated joint prone to complications from major surgeries. The next part to consider is that he is a FA and we may choose not to re-sign him due to injury concerns or cost concerns if he can command a $11M/yr deal in the open market next year. If that is the case we are down to only Carr and Scandrick. As for Scandrick I just don't think he is very good and we should seek to upgrade that position. He is always chasing in man coverage and makes very few plays on the ball even when he is in position. Scandrick best suits a zone-based scheme but this is not what we run and he is a major liability anytime we want press against 3-WR lineups.

I would suggest in the first 3 rounds getting 5 picks through trade downs and trying to come up with 1 DE, 1 OLB, 1 OG, 1 CB and then one other player where value and need match up well - maybe a #3WR/KR, another CB, second TE, Safety, another DE or another OL in roughly that order of preference.

Great posts. But don't you feel FS and OC are the top two needs?

As far as the fans who would dislike this approach, I think the reason is simple. They lack patience.

As far as the fans who would dislike this approach, I think the reason is simple. They lack patience.

FS is a need but there just isn't anyone outside of Barron who can help us this year IMO and I'd rather trade down than draft Barron as he's overrated this year due to the lack of safety talent. I'd take Harrison Smith at the bottom of the second but he'll probably go in the late first where I think there are better players available at other positions.

We have Poole for the year and we probably should pick up a developmental player for the position as I don't think Church will ever be a viable option as a starter. We actually may be best off just trying to fill this need in FA next year.

In the draft, perhaps we could target Dennard if he falls to the 4th round. Maybe a guy like Antonio Allen is worth it is a late round pick.

Now as for the CB issue we have Carr. Jenkins is hurt - who knows if he is going to even be ready at the start of the season. He had extensive shoulder surgery and that is a very complicated joint prone to complications from major surgeries. The next part to consider is that he is a FA and we may choose not to re-sign him due to injury concerns or cost concerns if he can command a $11M/yr deal in the open market next year. If that is the case we are down to only Carr and Scandrick. As for Scandrick I just don't think he is very good and we should seek to upgrade that position. He is always chasing in man coverage and makes very few plays on the ball even when he is in position. Scandrick best suits a zone-based scheme but this is not what we run and he is a major liability anytime we want press against 3-WR lineups.

I would suggest in the first 3 rounds getting 5 picks through trade downs and trying to come up with 1 DE, 1 OLB, 1 OG, 1 CB and then one other player where value and need match up well - maybe a #3WR/KR, another CB, second TE, Safety, another DE or another OL in roughly that order of preference.

I saw your mock and would be fine with it as well. Love Mercilus and Silatolu.
Corner is the most interesting position for me going into the draft, if they pick one in the first three rounds than it signals an ominous diagnosis for Jenkins' future. If they do not, than we should assume they are confident he will return to 100%. Having said that I did have Minnifield in this depth mock and think he's a guy who could contribute day one.

As far as the fans who would dislike this approach, I think the reason is simple. They lack patience.

I agree with Eskimo, just not sold on Barron. He will be servicable no question, but I don't see a dynamic element to his game.

Center is a tough one for me. Kowalski is a guy who really impressed me, but maybe the staff sees some flaws in his game that would be exposed over time because they sure were quick to give Costa his job back once he returned. I'm not as down on Costa as others, but they have to make the guy compete for the starting gig. Last year wasn't good enough.

I saw your mock and would be fine with it as well. Love Mercilus and Silatolu.
Corner is the most interesting position for me going into the draft, if they pick one in the first three rounds than it signals an ominous diagnosis for Jenkins' future. If they do not, than we should assume they are confident he will return to 100%. Having said that I did have Minnifield in this depth mock and think he's a guy who could contribute day one.

Minnifield has been dropping like a rock - I've seen him in the 5th round in some mocks lately. I think we should take a serious look in the 4th and 5th if he is still there as you did in your mock. I actually think we should take two CBs - one at the bottom of the second and one later on. We should have at least five CBs on the roster. It is a shame they tried to sneak Josh Thomas on the PS last year. I think he could have been competing with Scadrick this year for #3 CB.

Agree, there are going to be several blue chip players available at 14 this year and trading totally out of the first round and missing out on all of them would be dumb.

Stay put at 14 and get a blue chipper, thats the smart play here.

What if the blue chipper at 14 as only minimally better than who you could get in a trade down to #33 (second round) but you pick up two seconds and third rounder on your way down?

For example, some people have suggested Shea McClellin in the early second may not be a large step down from Melvin Ingram in the first. Some may prefer Shea because he is faster, taller and has longer arms.

I also just don't think there is a super blue-chipper at #14 or I would stay there and pick him. I like Coples but some have character concerns regarding him - he is the only guy I can see possibly falling to us.

This has to be a hypothetical wish or draft process. JG wouldn't be dumb enough and we already know what JJ can do with multiple picks... Bro 2009 called and said it wants it's draft back.

2009 was missing its first and third round picks so started at a gigantic disadvantage.

Then Jones decided to draft ST players and missed on the OL as per his usual protocol. Wade missed on the OLB who was a project player without a true pro position. I wouldn't use the trade down scenario as the cause of that bad draft.

This is a very deep draft but weak at the top. We can set ourselves up for several years of success if we knock it out of the park again like we did in 2010 and 2011.

2009 was missing its first and third round picks so started at a gigantic disadvantage.

Then Jones decided to draft ST players and missed on the OL as per his usual protocol. Wade missed on the OLB who was a project player without a true pro position. I wouldn't use the trade down scenario as the cause of that bad draft.

This is a very deep draft but weak at the top. We can set ourselves up for several years of success if we knock it out of the park again like we did in 2010 and 2011.

I think going BPA and hoping that is Decastro is the right move but... I don't think your idea after reading the whole thread is bad I knd of like it. I guess my main issue is the GM pulling the strings. If its JG making the moves Im a lil more confident JJ with this mich wiggle room scars me. Lol

2009 was missing its first and third round picks so started at a gigantic disadvantage.

Then Jones decided to draft ST players and missed on the OL as per his usual protocol. Wade missed on the OLB who was a project player without a true pro position. I wouldn't use the trade down scenario as the cause of that bad draft.

This is a very deep draft but weak at the top. We can set ourselves up for several years of success if we knock it out of the park again like we did in 2010 and 2011.

Agreed. I normally hate trading down but I get the feeling we will A) get some good offers and B) have multiple guys who we love and expect to be there at or near the end of round one.

I'd still be very happy with DeCastro, Cox, Poe or Barron (in that order) but my dream scenario is to fleece some desperate team in a trade down and then grab McClellin or Konz (or Zeitler or Branch or Glenn) with the first and maybe another one of them with the next pick.